State smoking ban will prohibit some outdoor smoking at Lawrence businesses

New law makes it illegal to smoke within a 10-foot radius of a doorway

Robert Knapp, Lawrence, left, and David Olcott, Lawrence, smoke Wednesday outside the entrance to Henry’s Coffee Shop, 11 E. Eighth St. A statewide smoking ban approved recently will likely make it illegal to smoke in many of the sidewalk dining and drinking areas in downtown Lawrence.

Lawrence businesses will soon have a new, statewide smoking ban to get used to. Enlarge video

A recently approved statewide smoking ban likely will make it illegal to smoke in many of the sidewalk dining and drinking areas in downtown.

A provision in the state law — scheduled to be signed by the governor on Friday — makes it illegal to smoke within a 10-foot radius of a doorway. Lawrence’s smoking ban has no such provision, and the city’s top attorney said she has not yet found any way for Lawrence to exempt itself from the new provision.

“Certainly we’re going to have to comply with the state law,” said Toni Wheeler, the city’s director of legal services. “It does differ from our ordinance. I think there will be changes on the horizon.”

The law changes are scheduled to begin July 1.

Wheeler stressed that she is not yet done with her review of the statewide ban, but she said a preliminary look indicates several sidewalk dining areas in downtown could be impacted.

In some cases, if a business’ doorway is in the middle of its storefront, the 10-foot radius requirement would make virtually all of the sidewalk dining area off limits to smoking. In other cases, some businesses may be allowed to keep portions of their sidewalk seating areas open to smokers, depending on the placement of their doors and the doors of neighboring businesses.

But many in the bar and restaurant industry are concerned, noting that there are a lot of doors in downtown.

“It definitely will have an impact on business,” said Subarna Bhattachan, who is a co-owner of La Parrilla, Zen Zero and Genovese — which all three have sidewalk seating areas. “Technically, I’m not sure where anybody is really going to be able to smoke in downtown.”

Several downtown bar owners did not return phone calls seeking comment. But a Lawrence-based lobbyist for the industry said the changes are coming at a time when consumers already are staying at home more and spending less at bars.

“It will be punitive,” said Phil Bradley, executive director of the Kansas Licensed Beverage Association. “It is hurting a group that already is hurting.”

Several physicians on Wednesday praised the changes. Dr. Steven Bruner, who helped organize the effort to create Lawrence’s ban in 2004, said the ban on smoking near doorways is consistent with what other bans across the country have done.

“The benefit of the provision is so you don’t have to walk through a cloud of smoke to enter and leave a business,” Bruner said.

He said he believed the public would accept the new outside provisions, especially as data continues to roll in showing that communities with strong smoking bans have lower rates of heart incidents.

“This is a huge step forward,” Bruner said. “We were a little remiss in not including this provision in the local ban from the beginning. It would have been better for the businesses, so they could have planned for it from the beginning.”

The state change does come just months after Lawrence city commissioners relaxed rules to allow some bars to have sidewalk seating areas. Previously, only restaurants could have the sidewalk areas.

The state law changes are expected to impact more than just the downtown areas. Other potential impacts include:

• Smoking decks at bars and restaurants also will have to meet the 10 foot requirement. The city’s current law allows such decks to be 80 percent enclosed and still qualify as a smoking deck. The new state law will require they be no more than 70 percent enclosed.

• An exemption allowing smoking in a specially ventilated break room at Hallmark’s Lawrence production facility likely will not be allowed under the state law, Wheeler said.

• In the city code, hotels currently can designate 25 percent of their rooms as open for smoking. The state code would cap that level at 20 percent.

City commissioners are expected to receive a report in the next several weeks on what changes the city will need to make to its law to comply with the new state law. The state law specifically does not allow any city to have a law that is less strict than the state’s.

This is ridiculous and I'm not a smoker. Now two Senators are making a plan that would require all US legal workers to carey and ID card. I feel like our country is turning into NAZI Germany back in the day. "Where's your papers" Wonder if certain groups will have to eventually wear some certain kind of badge too. Our freedoms are slowly slipping away. Welcome to the New World Order folks.

I am a supporter of the smoking ban, but I think this is a little extreme. And really sucks for the businesses that complied with the city law and put the money into setting up outdoor seating for their smoking customers.

Sunshine, NORML..just do what i do, smoke wherever the hell you feel like it. The state made its decision, now lets see it enforced.
May seem like a dick move, but who cares? this statute is overreaching. The only way that second hand smoke will affect your health, is if 1) you're a sissy, or 2) you're constantly surrounded by it (as in the case where smoking is allowed in the home.) So, kids with parents that smoke indoors are screwed, but its the parents choice, and the kids probably wont amount to much, not with that kind of upbringing anyways.

What I find amusing is if the City of Lawrence doesn't like a State law, they cry fowl and then tell the State to stuff it because of Home Rule provisions. I doubt they will on this one. Either way the enforcement of this law is going to be like watching a State version of the Key Stone Cops. The City can't truly enforce their own current law so what makes the state think they can? I haven't seen the law yet but I wonder if they are making the business owner responsible for making sure the 10 ft rule is followed. In some parts of town because of the way door ways are located it will make most of the side walk an illegal zone. Now we will get to see how many drunks are ran over for smoking in the street.

The State is crying about sales tax revenue falling and the State may have just took another hit. If smokers decide to not buckle under like some did for the current city law there will be even less people spending money out. Where you law makers going to get your revenue from now? Idiots.

My sentiments exactly headdoctor. Our governments may end up even farther in the red, but at least the air will be clean of cigarette smoke. Effectively, all these bans are pushing the smoker's out of the public and into the public's pocket.

TheStonesSuck:
The only way that second hand smoke will affect your health, is if 1) you're a sissy, or 2) you're constantly surrounded by it (as in the case where smoking is allowed in the home.) So, kids with parents that smoke indoors are screwed, but its the parents choice, and the kids probably wont amount to much, not with that kind of upbringing anyways.

This is like saying "the only way you can get cancer is if you're a sissy" or "the only way to get pregnant is by drinking soda out of a can." They don't equate.

In addition, your statement about children not amounting to anything being brought up in a home with smokers implies that the child will not rise above their circumstances to become more than the crap they were surrounded by as a child. I'm not arguing that parents who smoke around their kids aren't bad parents, because they are. I'm arguing that the child's future is not necessarily dictated by their upbringing. Too often it is, but not always.

Could be mistaken, but I think the provisions of the State law will also prohibit smoking on the decks built at Louise's, Quinton's, Replay, etc. The restriction has to do with the definition of an enclosed space, not just the proximity to the doorway.

Will the City be fined if they allow people to smoke on the sidewalks downtown, or is policing the sidewalk for smokers passing by the responsibility of the shop owners?

I wish there was an unbiased study out there that would look at how many smokers stop going out or go out less due to a ban. And the same can be done for the number of non-smokers that go out or go out more after a ban. People keep saying bans stop smokers from going out and increase non-smokers going out. And personally, I have doubts about both. I think people that go out, go out. Smoke or not.

@d-prowess:
When I was a smoker, the ban absolutely kept me from going out for a beer when the weather was bad. If you totally took away any place to smoke at a bar, even outdoors, I for sure wouldn't have gone. Now an ex-smoker, the ban doesn't make me go out more. And, the main reason I quit was the previous tax increase... take that for what it's worth...

You want to kill yourself, go for it. We unfortunately have laws like this in place because of selfish people like TheStonesSuck who don't care who they harm.

Do you sit at work all day and smoke? Most likely, you go outside. So, how darned hard is it for you to walk 10 feet from a door so you aren't blowing your smoke at others? Is walking 10 feet too hard for you because you have no lung capacity left? Maybe it's time for you to change instead of forcing your smoke on others.

By the way, I smoked for over 20 years. Those that can't figure out you're better off w/out them are idiots.

I'm a smoker and i don't think its a big deal. Courteous smokers don't hang right by the door , they do their best to stay away from anyone and stay down wind at that. If you don't do that you're asking for some oxygen challenged person running up and getting in your face about it anyway. If you can't find a place to smoke without offending someone just don't.

Far too late on this battle but I object to the entire line of reasoning for smoking bans in privately-owned establishments. Workers do not have to work in places where there is smoking if they don't wish to do so. Customers do not have to support such businesses either.

Now, all this has amounted to huge double whammy for several establishments in town. They adjusted to the ordinance and, in many cases, invested heavily in outdoor furniture, heaters, canopies, etc. Now the state is coming through again and wiping that out in favor of what is actually generally a more loose, tobacco industry-friendly piece of legislation. Guess who's caught in the middle again? You got it!

How long before we ban certain cooking oils? I will never feel safe knowing my lunch might have saturated fats in it and, of course, why should I have to ask someone or adjust my choices of restaurant to avoid them? I mean, duh, everyone knows that only self-righteous people should make any decisions for anybody!

It's my God-given right as an American to have my government taste my food for me, tell me whether or not to allow smoking in my bar and, for that matter, tell me what I should put in my body!

I wonder if there is any restriction in the City about private clubs. If not, the bars could just skirt the law by becoming a members only establishment/gentle mans bar and then just thumb their nose at the State and maybe even the City as well.

I can just see establishments painting a 10 ft. marker on the sidewalk sort of like the 3 point line in basketball. LMAO.

@Scruggsy... I would probably have fallen into the category of non-smoker that would have not popped into a bar downtown if there was smoking still allowed. Not all the time, just occasionally. But I still think those rare occurrences from people on both sides (smokers & non-smokers) probably cancel each other out. So it still comes down to the fact that the majority of people that go to the bars, still probably went. Smoking or not.

I think they should ban everything dangerous: driving/riding in cars, going out in the sun, dancing, all sports, staircases, cell phones, soda, bikes, hammers, beer, fire or anything that can create flame and lightning just to name a few.

Here in Chicago, after over two years, the fanfare is forgotten history. After the first winter, many small neighborhood bars (not restaurants, no kids) had to decide to risk a few fines and allow smoking, or close. Generally, restaurants do ok with higher turnover and lots of call in orders "to go".

Anyone here remember when doctors and patient's smoked in the doctor's office and the waiting room? Oh, yes, and the hospitals! People hooked up to their IV's with a cigarette dangling from their lips.
I quit a hundred times before I made it to the five year mark. I feel your pain if you still smoke, but I do not want to be around it.

I for one am SO glad to hear this. Two members of our family suffer from asthma, and walking down Mass street in the evenings while trying to breathe fresh air is like running a gauntlet. Smoking within 10 feet of a door brings smoke right inside to the patrons every time that door is opened and closed, and those business that place ashtrays right next to the door seem to encourage it. Please don't exempt Lawrence--this is the step that is needed to make our town breathing-friendly.

Back when establishments were either smoking or non-smoking, I wouldn't ever smoke in front of a non-smoking business; I just thought it discourteous. I find it amusing that the people who pushed smokers outdoors everywhere are now griping about sidewalks clogged with smokers.

Now I take care to never toss cigarette butts in the street, but I suppose it will soon be illegal for businesses to have ashtrays by the door, so... on the sidewalk, in the street they go.

This just gets stupider and stupider.
It is time for people to wake up from their lemming like psychosis. This is just a prelude for taking more and more rights and feedoms away.
It is time for civil disobedience. If all smokers just keep smoking wherever they feel like. The cops will not have time to babysit all the little whiners out there.
Smoke em if you got em folks. Lets start taking our country back from the socialists that want to take all of our freedoms away.

I am not a smoker and I don't enjoy being in smokey areas, which of course was solved by the indoor smoking ban.

This would essentially ban any smoking downtown at all. All the bars that spent the money to accommodate smokers are now going to have just wasted that money. I don't see this as anything but an attack on small business. Though I guess it could also be viewed as a ridiculous trap to rake in money from fines...I'm envisioning people standing in the middle of Lawrence streets so they can smoke a cigarette...I mean seriously within 10 feet of any door?! What if you live in a loft downtown? What a pain in the butt to go smoke a cigarette...

The state of Kansas needs to focus on how broke it is and take care of the whole stupidity of renaming our capital google...not come up with another display of insanity for the rest of the states to judge...

First thing i have to say is this. The do gooders who got this bill introduced should be banned by every business who can find a way to survive. Ask around for names of those who helped support it and use your business owners right to refuse them service. Make life HEL! for them. Second. Any business owner who wants to sign up for the suit against the state check back Sunday for a way to contact me and get involved. I plan on filing the papers next week, if our state leader has the @#@$# to sign this illegal bill. This ban is a huge nail in the coffin of Kansas Business. The state will drop about 40% in tax revenue collections in the first 60 to 90 days. It will stabilize at an average of 35% lower. This will cost every Kansan a huge chunk of additional tax burden. Welcome to East Germany boys and girls. You though Kansas had financial issues before this, haa haww your about to see what a depression is like. Thank you do gooders.

Doesn't anyone else see the hypocrisy in all of this? Tobacco is bad, so let's ban it in public places and private businesses, including outdoors near entrances of private businesses, and let's tax the heck out of cigarettes so we (the legislature) can get some more money from people with a habit that is said to be as bad as heroine to kick, and maybe that will get some people to quit, but don't forget you can smoke at the casino, where we (the legislature) want you to spend your money so we can get our hands on that, too, and all the while we (the legislature) is spending money on a "gambling problem" ad campaign this month (yeah gambling is bad, too, we (the legislature) have to tell you that, but please please don't stop spending your retirement money or money for food, mortgage etc at the casinos!). Hypocrites in Topeka.

"This is just a prelude for taking more and more rights and feedoms away. Smoke em if you got em folks. Lets start taking our country back from the socialists that want to take all of our freedoms away."

"Welcome to East Germany boys and girls. You though Kansas had financial issues before this, haa haww your about to see what a depression is like."

The preceding quotes brought to you by your friends and neighbors. Run for your lives, boys and girls.

I don't smoke or drink but I just had this funny vision. A guy goes out, drinks himself silly and then gets into his car to drive home. About two blocks later, he's lighting a cigarette while driving, loses control and hits another car? What do they charge him with? Are the charges due to smoking and inattentive driving, which in reality caused the accident, or DUI?

I hate smoke and am in favor of INDOOR smoking bans... but I'm not in favor if making it illegal to smoke outside. I don't agree with the 10 feet rule AT ALL. Sure it's kind of annoying to have to walk past smokers when going into a place, but who cares. What about places like the Sandbar and the Red Lion that have built a small patio for smokers? This is just really stupid and I hope no one bothers to enforce it.

This kind of stupid rule makes me embarrassed to be in favor of indoor smoking bans. I still am, but now I'm embarrassed. This is the kind of thing that can backfire for those who want smoking bans, get the whole thing thrown out because someone got greedy. Whomever included this clause went WAY too far. I hope it is enforced about as much as jaywalking. It's outdoors! Who cares!

Smokers have a right to smoke. Non-smokers have a right to not smoke. Put the two together & the non-smoker's rights are taken away. So how fair is that? Great rule. Let's reclaim outside seating. Once the smoking ban was put into place, the outside seating was for the smoking crowd only.

you know , first it was get the smokers out of the bars and restaurants , ok , you did that , now you want the doorways , cool , now you want the smoking patio. Go back inside and sit down and shut up !

The argument is not over nonsmokers' right to not smoke (which has never been in question), but the intake by them of secondhand smoke created by smokers. This is not the same as the act of smoking itself. That would be like, if I was eating a steak, you would be eating the steak too, since you were close enough to me to smell it.

How are they going to enforce this? On campus, there's no smoking within 20 feet of doors, but people do it all the time. It doesn't help that there are ashtrays much closer to the doors than 20 feet.

As a side note, it amuses me that there are "No smoking within 20 feet" signs on the traffic booths, which presumably means that you can't smoke on the sidewalk while walking by, nor even in your car if you drive by the booth.

I'm not a smoker, in fact really hate the smell and aftermath the habit causes to ones body. However, not allowing smoking outside is just absurd. What's next-telling smokers they can't smoke in their own homes, or hey, forget about it out in your yard too? You never know what neighbor might be getting polluted too! When smoking was allowed inside restaurants, I just plain avoided them. It's a matter of choice and preference...

Look at the headlines in the paper today. It's ban this, ban that, prohibit this, prohibit that. I have never seen such an all out assault on freedom. Is there really a problem with drinking beer in college, smoking on a sidewalk in the open air, ranchers burning grass in the pastures like they have since Kansas was a state, and K-2, synthetic cannibis or whatever that is. Are people dropping dead all over the place, or is this politicians wanting the appearance of earning their pay as "lawmakers." Is there really, really, truly a problem here? This is addition to national headlines concerning salt in foods, proposed federal regulations on fishing in rivers and lakes, and health regulations should health care "reform" pass. This regulation business is really getting out of hand. You have to look at the few things left you can do.

TopJayhawk (anonymous) says…
This just gets stupider and stupider.
It is time for people to wake up from their lemming like psychosis. This is just a prelude for taking more and more rights and feedoms away.
It is time for civil disobedience. If all smokers just keep smoking wherever they feel like. The cops will not have time to babysit all the little whiners out there.
Smoke em if you got em folks. Lets start taking our country back from the socialists that want to take all of our freedoms away
/////

They aren't taking freedom away. The mass majority are non-smokers and we have to put up with the minorities damned smoke. Last I heard, democracy was based on majority rule. We are talking about people's health and if you can't walk your butt 10 feet from a door to smoke, you sir are the lazy whiner.

You complain about socialism, but it was your fine republican controlled KS govt that passed this.

I get sick of the "holier than thou" attitude non-smokers. Last I knew smokers get taxed which goes to the state, helping smokers/non-smokers. Do you really want us all to quit and put the state further in debt? If you ask me they should be taxing fruit, vegetables, and other healthy goods more then they tax cigarettes because you health nuts will cost more in healthcare benefits than smokers will (this has been researched and determined, look it up) You wanted us outside? We go outside. Now you're complaining about us being outside? Oh No, you have to smell smoke a few times when you walk downtown. Big deal. You have to smell exhaust and the Kansas River too. If you are worried about a little smoke ,do what they do in Korea/Japan, wear a surgical mask when you go downtown.

If the Kansas don't give a damn attitude would have prevailed you can bet the the most expensive medical insurance in the world was waiting to add more to the medical insurance premiums,deductibles and co-pays. The industry is relieving millions of consumers of as much expendable cash as possible as we speak..... and finding a shocking number of supporters.

KANSAS GOVERNMENT SUPPORTS LUNG CANCER = Kansans love to pay more and more for their medical insurance.

You stink. The only ones who smoke are the white trash folks anyway. Restaurants and bars are better off without you anyway. Now decent people can go out to eat and drink everywhere in Kansas and not have to come home smelling like an ashtray.

sunshine-noise: "I feel like our country is turning into NAZI Germany back in the day."

Well, I can tell you one thing for sure -- you aren't Jewish.

Comparing the slaughter of 6 million Jews with not being able to smoke at the doorway of a smoke-free interior space isn't just hyperbole, it is pathetic. If you want to smoke, either light yourself on fire or walk 10 feet away from the door. Not that big of a deal.

"The first modern, nationwide tobacco ban was imposed by the Nazi Party in every German university, post office, military hospital, and Nazi Party office, under the auspices of Karl Astel's Institute for Tobacco Hazards Research, created in 1941 under orders from Adolf Hitler. Major anti-tobacco campaigns were widely broadcast by the Nazis until the demise of the regime in 1945."

If any business really wants to allow smoking couldn't they just charge an annual membership fee and make it a private club? I think this has been done before in other cities that had smoking bans. Just a thought.

I happen to agree with TheStonesSuck.

thefisherman (anonymous) says…
This is like saying "the only way you can get cancer is if you're a sissy" or "the only way to get pregnant is by drinking soda out of a can." They don't equate.
===============================
True, but I'll bet just about everyone on the planet has accidentally inhaled some second-hand smoke, car exhaust, etc at some point in their lives. All of these people WILL NOT get cancer.

TheStonesSuck has a point about prolonged exposure to second-hand smoke being the health risk, not "walking through a cloud of smoke" as smoking Nazi Dr. Bruner put it. Have fun enforcing it!

What's sad and pathetic is that they will have to enforce it because too many feel they have to make a point and be obnoxious and disregard the rights of the majority. I do feel for the poor smokers because walking an extra 10 feet for a smoke will probably make their emphysema worse. And they aren't used to getting that much exercise since they can't walk far before being out of breath.

It's my God-given right as an American to have my government taste my food for me, tell me whether or not to allow smoking in my bar and, for that matter, tell me what I should put in my body!

Through your sarcasm, you actually make the right point. It is indeed my right to determine what I put into my own body - not the right of the government OR the smoker standing next to me. It really is that simple.

No, I think you misunderstand the point I make. I'll repeat: you do not have to visit that establishment if they allow smoking. The smoking ban actually has the effect of forcing you to be exposed to smoking more since (a) you don't have to go inside a place where there is smoking allowed and (b) not allowing it inside means that smokers are now outside blowing smoke whichever way the wind blows... and sometimes in your direction.

Wasn't this country founded with the help of tobacco? I do suppose if one were to try and quit smoking, the ban might make it a little easier. I visited a city that had a ban just like this one and actually smoked 50% less.

I'm a non-smoker who is very against this ban. First it's not the state's place to tell us where and were we can not smoke except for the obvious places... schools, hospitals exc. The second proble I have is hello... the statist in Topeka banned smoking everywhere except in State run casinos... Can you say using legislation to get rid of your competition! I urge everyone to research and vote Libertarian and take our state back!

The decline in people going out for entertainment has less to do with smoking bans and more to do with less time and money to spend on entertainment and the increase in what's available at home. Thanks to sites like hulu.com, I can watch movies and TV shows online for free. Why should I hassle with going out and search for parking when I have so many choices at home? When I do go out, I love the lack of smoke in bars and other live music venues.

"gatekeeper (anonymous) says…
Carie Nation was for prohibition. All this law is doing is telling people where they can and can't smoke (like liquor laws), not outlawing smoking. Bad comparison."

Nah, it is the perfect analogy. Carrie Nation believed so strongly that her morals were more correct than others', that she used the law to attempt to force others to live their lives the way she saw fit. She was the perfect progressive, just like modern day progressives who, if they could, would reach into your shower and adjust the temperature so that it is "just right."

This is a great idea! We have stopped taking our kids to certain parts of downtown because of all the horrible smoke that the smokers blow in every direction. Nothing worse than a smoker blowing smoke in the direction of a kid! I know not all smokers do this but way too many do....

You all want to complain about people smoking,But what do you think when we all have to breath the fumes from the exhaust from your vehicles tail pipes! What do you think thats doing to everyones lungs.Also keep on and if everyone was to stop smoking then who would you have to bail your buts out when theres finiancial issues,Where do you think the money is going from us smokers.It's not just going in the air.It's bailling all you people out that set behind your desk or wherever and complaining.If you want to talk about polluted air don't just talk about Smokers.Also smoking isn't the only thing that stinks people.I have walked by plenty of people and there cologne smells so bad that I would much rather smell smoke than YOU!!!!!!!!

I'm tired of the argument that private businesses should be allowed to do whatever they want in their business. If this was even a valid argument then they should be arguing against liquor licenses and fire codes also. As far as I know, these are things that protect people who work at/patronize these businesses from greedy business owners who only care about # 1! These laws are in place to protect people just like the smoking ban is. Just because you choose to smoke, doesn't mean that I choose to smoke. The Lawrence ban has always included an exception for a business that makes a certain percentage of their sales from the sale of tobacco and tobacco paraphernalia. In Durango, CO a similar ban exists and locals that find it important to have a bar that they can smoke at have banded together and made sure that they all buy their cigarettes from 1 bar downtown. There has been no such cooperation on the part of smokers in Lawrence even though several businesses have tried and failed to tap into the idea. As a server and patron, I appreciate the ban. I appreciate being able to walk into and out of buildings with my family (which includes a 7 yr old) without running into an unwelcome cloud of smoke!

sillypeople ) You are another lemming control freak, go back to CO. The smoking ban is a big joke and illegal as hel! . Fire codes, licenses , those are not even on the same page as this ban. This ban is a group of lemmings who wants to make Kansas like California and have total control. You do not have enough brain in your head to even read and decide to stay away from a business that allows smoking and has a SIGN to warn you. CHOICE is a simple idea that keeps us alive in our every day struggles. As written, this new law is illegal. If it restricted doorways , schools with children and had been written with allowance for businesses to put up signs warning people( smoking allowed ) and some other changes, it would be legal. As written, it is worthless and will be settled in court. ::::::: Any business can be smoke free if they want, any business can be smoker friendly if they want. They can put up a sign, that is called CHOICE . If this law is signed today, i will put up a smoker friendly sign July 1 2010. I will allow smoking in my business. You then have a choice to shop smoke free or come to my business and enjoy a smoke and shop. I am going to file a suit next week if this bill is signed. End of story.